Hi again Poirot,

As a 'prat', I am entitled to make stupid, sweeping statements, I'm sure you would agree: it goes with the territory.

But I do protest that I have ever deliberately insulted you - I've perhaps made negative comments, but I've always tried to make sure they are accurate and fair assessments of you and your philosophy, such as it is.

I hope that we can maintain that level of respect for each other's opinions.

Cheers :)

Joe

"that should be "throw-away".

Yes, I believe I've called you a "prat" on a couple of occasions.

Take that behaviour as a sign of me throwing my arms in the air with exasperation as you stoop to making insulting generalisations about me (of whom you have little real knowledge)....or do you think labbelling me as a friend of the Taliban is accurate? It was a cheap shot. And merely because I see the problem in traditional societies as much more complicated than you and situations whereby we are attempting to impose our way of doing things (us with first-world infrastructure) on those who haven't the societal means or structure to support it.

Btw, Vandana Shiva would have to be one of my top five heroes in this world.....and she's busy fighting off first-world corporations who have clamoured to relieve peasants of their livelihoods, their autonomy and their land and water. She does it quietly and clearly, knowing what has sustained these communities for eons.

I grew up in New Guinea and I saw the destructive effect of too-rapid Westernisation on tribal peoples. Even villages that had been Christianised for 2 or 3 generations and had a mission close, cultures were often simply incompatible as a first approximation and it took a long time for one culture to diffuse into the other.

Asking any society to leap 500 or 1000 years of development in one jump is not going to happen overnight and probably not ever if force is used.

Thank you, Poirot, we both agree that problems in traditional societies are extremely complicated, and that their evolution into modern societies is bound to be long, painful and indeterminate - certainly not pre-ordained.

But I'm relieved that you mention infrastructure - as I understand it, in Afghanistan, i.e. relevant to topic, the Coalition forces have been putting in all manner of infrastructure across the country. Yes, perhaps in anticipation of being able to exploit the oil and gas and minerals, but nevertheless roads where none existed before, electricity, schools and universities, dams, TV and radio stations, agricultural extension work, and so on.

And the longer they stay, the more - one hopes - the Taliban will wither away. Of course, in those circumstances. the Taliban can be expected to ramp up their destruction of infrastructure projects, and schools, and kindergartens, and market-places and other easy targets.

Sorry about labelling you as a 'friend of the Taliban' but if it walks like a duck and squawks like a duck .......

Cheers :)

Joe

"...but if it walks like a duck and squawks like a duck......"

Disingenuous prat.

............

You won't be discussing these subjects with me any more, Joe.

Cheers : )